|
It requires being quite a bit more performative than that, but it is insanely easy. The only thing you can't do is talk about your sex life. And I do mean anything. Not even the fact you have a boyfriend. It ruins their fantasy. It's practically Korean Idol rules.
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:46 |
|
|
I don't understand why every beautiful woman (or man!) doesn't start up an ASMR youtube/patreon. It's free money for whispering into a microphone for a few hours each week. The only work hazard is that one of your viewers gets too obsessed and comes to your house and murders you
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
Subs to Lauren Southern's fascist ASMR will be in the millions. Also there's a rumour that she's joining Milo's new "NotBreitbart" news. My guess is Gavin also leaves Rebel sooner rather than later, possibly to link up with Milo as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
stupid sexy reactionaries
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
i dunno about you guys but having tons of these extremely boring and dumb videos on youtube is great when i have trouble sleeping i just set one of these slowly speaking idiots on headphones and it hits me better than a valium, as long as the things they're talking about aren't dumb enough to make me cringe
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
the future of the far right is samus doing a reading of the protocols of the elders of zion
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
Trumps Baby Hands posted:I don't understand why every beautiful woman (or man!) doesn't start up an ASMR youtube/patreon. It's free money for whispering into a microphone for a few hours each week. The only work hazard is that one of your viewers gets too obsessed and comes to your house and murders you There's a twitch streaming girl that doesn't do any of the stereotypes that people think of with streaming girls, but she said recently that she drove by her old job (less than a year after streaming) and she basically has her retirement already. So it seems like a good business plan for the moment. I like mario maker
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Mismeasure of Man is just as bullshit at the Bell Curve, maybe moreso I read that growing up and agreed with its basic message but felt vague unease about the methodology. My basic take away was 'reductionism in intelligence research is real dumb, also science is infested with the ghosts of eugenics'. What else specifically was bad about the book?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:I read that growing up and agreed with its basic message but felt vague unease about the methodology. My basic take away was 'reductionism in intelligence research is real dumb, also science is infested with the ghosts of eugenics'. What else specifically was bad about the book? It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science. Gould, who is a paleontologist and not a psychologist, believes in a theory of intelligence known as "multiple intelligences", meaning that rather than intelligence being unitary and general it can be divided into different subsections. In other words, what we call intelligence is essentially a set of skills and aptitudes that can vary more or less independently of each other. This contrasts to the prevalent, (TBH, unanimous), view from psychologists of intelligence that understands intelligence as general capability (g) that, while there may be some variation, performs consistently over a variety of cognitive abilities. Gould's explanation for the discrepancy between his view and the view of researchers is that the researchers are a) all racists and b) use patently flawed methodology. Rather than re-litigating the merits of these points, (which I think have be extensively disproved), I just want to ask people: does this conform with your conception of how science operates? That entire fields are led by radical ideologues, and that despite glaring methodological flaws obvious even to laymen no dissenting views are accepted by journals because they fail to conform? Isn't that the same view we've heard time and time again from right-wingers and conspiracy theorists and laughed away? Gould's book is three decades old and, despite several studies attempting to prove his hypothesis and in fact applying exactly the methods he proposes, no confirmation of multiple intelligences has emerged. General intelligence remains the consensus view. IMO that just blows Gould out of the water. If he were actually right there would be some sort of scientific support for him now, and instead there's diddly-squat. Thug Lessons has issued a correction as of 00:29 on Mar 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
can you break that up a bit? nevermind. It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
Lindsey O. Graham posted:pedantry regarding a tlc music video, it's nice to see we have hobbies only 90s kids will remember how to be this obnoxious!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Heaven Spacey posted:only 90s kids will remember how to be this obnoxious!! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science. Gould, who is a paleontologist and not a psychologist, believes in a theory of intelligence known as "multiple intelligences", meaning that rather than intelligence being unitary and general it can be divided into different subsections. In other words, what we call intelligence is essentially a set of skills and aptitudes that can vary more or less independently of each other. This contrasts to the prevalent, (TBH, unanimous), view from psychologists of intelligence that understands intelligence as general capability (g) that, while there may be some variation, performs consistently over a variety of cognitive abilities. Gould's explanation for the discrepancy between his view and the view of researchers is that the researchers are a) all racists and b) use patently flawed methodology. Rather than re-litigating the merits of these points, (which I think have be extensively disproved), I just want to ask people: does this conform with your conception of how science operates? That entire fields are led by radical ideologues, and that despite glaring methodological flaws obvious even to laymen no dissenting views are accepted by journals because they fail to conform? Isn't that the same view we've heard time and time again from right-wingers and conspiracy theorists and laughed away? Gould's book is three decades old and, despite several studies attempting to prove his hypothesis and in fact applying exactly the methods he proposes, no confirmation of multiple intelligences has emerged. General intelligence remains the consensus view. IMO that just blows Gould out of the water. If he were actually right there would be some sort of scientific support for him now, and instead there's diddly-squat. so...iq test...good? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
quote:That entire fields are led by radical ideologues, and that despite glaring methodological flaws obvious even to laymen no dissenting views are accepted by journals because they fail to conform?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
THC posted:but enough about econ 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Mismeasure of Man is just as bullshit at the Bell Curve, maybe moreso Says noted scientist Thug Lessons  Social psychology has a bit of a reproducibility problem so yes, IQ studies are mostly bullshit. Big Fat Iguana has issued a correction as of 02:03 on Mar 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
Big Fat Iguana posted:Says noted scientist Thug Lessons 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science. Gould, who is a paleontologist and not a psychologist, believes in a theory of intelligence known as "multiple intelligences", meaning that rather than intelligence being unitary and general it can be divided into different subsections. In other words, what we call intelligence is essentially a set of skills and aptitudes that can vary more or less independently of each other. This contrasts to the prevalent, (TBH, unanimous), view from psychologists of intelligence that understands intelligence as general capability (g) that, while there may be some variation, performs consistently over a variety of cognitive abilities. Gould's explanation for the discrepancy between his view and the view of researchers is that the researchers are a) all racists and b) use patently flawed methodology. Rather than re-litigating the merits of these points, (which I think have be extensively disproved), I just want to ask people: does this conform with your conception of how science operates? That entire fields are led by radical ideologues, and that despite glaring methodological flaws obvious even to laymen no dissenting views are accepted by journals because they fail to conform? Isn't that the same view we've heard time and time again from right-wingers and conspiracy theorists and laughed away? Gould's book is three decades old and, despite several studies attempting to prove his hypothesis and in fact applying exactly the methods he proposes, no confirmation of multiple intelligences has emerged. General intelligence remains the consensus view. IMO that just blows Gould out of the water. If he were actually right there would be some sort of scientific support for him now, and instead there's diddly-squat. Yeah, spoke with a cognitive neuroscientist who said anyone who still using a single unitary concept of intelligence for anything is stuck in the past using outdated and discredited research. The closest you might come to the 'best' measure of cognitive ability is executive function (ability to plan for the future and execute on that plan), but you're not going to derive that from how well you score on word associations. IQ as measured is mostly a crock of poo poo for measuring intelligence, although it does reasonably measure linguistic ability (assuming the test taker is proficient in the language the test is being given in and has been exposed to the words used). Linguistic proficiency *does* impact basically every other domain though - its real hard to learn math if you don't understand the lessons being given - but its heavily language dependent. Even seemingly non-verbal stuff like spatial reasoning still relies heavily on language to teach the basic concepts involved in mentally spinning a cube in space. She didn't speak to the idea of emotional intelligence because that wasn't her focus and couldn't think of any real way to measure it off the top of her head. So yeah, IQ is a poor concept that mostly reflects exposure to language, cultural proficiency and availability of education, rather than how naturally talented someone is, and trying to sort people based on IQ is a real lovely thing to do that happens anyways because science takes a long time to change (and its a convenient tool for discrimination because, surprise, most people who score well on IQ tests will be white and middle class or better from stable homes).
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:something tells me that a cosplay babe with reactionary politics won't have much trouble maintaining a dedicated following If she does videos dressed as any Kill la Kill or Love Live I will hunt her as our ancestors hunted beasts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 05:06
|
|
THC posted:but enough about econ
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
Bud K ninja sword posted:It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science. A good book/paper/etc
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
Race Realists posted:the J0OS are opening up the floodgates so immigrants can come in the country, mate with our women, and create an entire generation of multi-racial people so the populations IQ level can lower, so they can rule them easier My wife and I just had the first of many nonwhite babies. Imagine...we can finally be rid of white people and all we have to do is keep loving : )
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
As so it is foretold, all threads on the alt-right eventually become word dumps on esoteric subjects as so it was in D&D, as so it was in PYF, and so it is in CSPAM
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 07:07
|
|
|
Gizmoduck_5000 posted:My wife and I just had the first of many nonwhite babies. Imagine...we can finally be rid of white people and all we have to do is keep loving : ) you are comitting white genocide
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 07:32
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:you are comitting white genocide and it's absolutely divine...
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:Yeah, spoke with a cognitive neuroscientist who said anyone who still using a single unitary concept of intelligence for anything is stuck in the past using outdated and discredited research. The closest you might come to the 'best' measure of cognitive ability is executive function (ability to plan for the future and execute on that plan), but you're not going to derive that from how well you score on word associations. IQ as measured is mostly a crock of poo poo for measuring intelligence, although it does reasonably measure linguistic ability (assuming the test taker is proficient in the language the test is being given in and has been exposed to the words used). Linguistic proficiency *does* impact basically every other domain though - its real hard to learn math if you don't understand the lessons being given - but its heavily language dependent. Even seemingly non-verbal stuff like spatial reasoning still relies heavily on language to teach the basic concepts involved in mentally spinning a cube in space. She didn't speak to the idea of emotional intelligence because that wasn't her focus and couldn't think of any real way to measure it off the top of her head. I can tell you that even the most up-to-date models of intelligence still use g. They also subdivide intelligence into broad categories like processing speed and visual acuity, and further into specific tasks, but all operate under a g framework which is determinate of all lower-stratum abilities. Your cognitive neuroscientist friend is mistaken, or otherwise operating on models from cognitive neuroscience (which I don't think is rigorous enough to say anything of value about the function of intelligence at this point) rather than those from psychology. The relationship between IQ and g is controversial even within the field of intelligence research, but the heart of the criticism you're offering here is wrong. Some of the most g-loaded tests, such as Raven's Progressive Matrices, don't measure or depend on linguistic ability at all. They're actually presented without instruction, completely eliminating the language component. These tests can accurately measure intelligence in people with autism who lack or have highly diminished linguistic ability, to the point that their scores equal those of non-autistic people whereas they appear highly deficient when subjected to a more linguistics-oriented test like the Stanford-Binet. So no, IQ tests and other intelligence tests do no only measure linguistic ability, nor does linguistic ability act as the primary predictor of intelligence. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Lindsey O. Graham posted:this is what happened to milo: without a doubt 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 08:30
|
|
|
THC posted:The Montasque posted:Also there's a rumour that she's joining Milo's new "NotBreitbart" news. THC posted:The Montasque posted:Also there's a rumour that she's joining Milo's new "NotBreitbart" news. THC posted:The Montasque posted:Also there's a rumour that she's joining Milo's new "NotBreitbart" news.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 08:40
|
|
Rebel
|
THC posted:The Ah. The Huffington Post business model
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 08:42
|
|
|
Grondoth posted:As so it is foretold, all threads on the alt-right eventually become word dumps on esoteric subjects They get super mad if you demystify their special words by comparing them to high school equivalents. There's a lot of syncretic dorks out there who think we should follow a caste model and constantly throw around words like Kshatriya, Brahmin, or Shudra when talking about Westerners. If you say Kshatriya=Jock, Brahmin=Nerd, or Shudra=burger flippers they get insanely mad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 08:48
|
|
|
thanks to baloogan i learned that "prolix" is a word that means "wall of text"
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 09:05
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:thanks to baloogan i learned that "prolix" is a word that means "wall of text" I learned that from reading Catch-22 in high school
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 09:36
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:They get super mad if you demystify their special words by comparing them to high school equivalents. There's a lot of syncretic dorks out there who think we should follow a caste model and constantly throw around words like Kshatriya, Brahmin, or Shudra when talking about Westerners. I think you mean Kshatriya=warrior, Brahmin=cleric, or Shudra=foot massage person can we bring back dalit for baloogan and then we have a full adventuring party
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I learned that from reading Catch-22 in high school
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
Big Fat Iguana posted:Says noted scientist Thug Lessons Doesn't your IQ literally go up if you become richer?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 17:23
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:i gotta read that book again it holds up perfectly Thug Lessons posted:prolix prose also yeah, I don't understand how people can't intuit that there's vastly different kinds of intelligence. I nailed the reading comprehension and writing section of the SAT, but near-flunked the math section. I had a friend who was a genius electrical engineer, but had the social intelligence of a toddler. if you lump all that into a single "g value" then he and I have equal intelligence because I can't do basic calculus and he can't handle his poo poo at a music festival
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science... Hmmm Nature posted:An ambitious effort to replicate 100 research findings in psychology ended last week — and the data look worrying. Results posted online on 24 April, which have not yet been peer-reviewed, suggest that key findings from only 39 of the published studies could be reproduced. quote:I just want to ask people: does this conform with your conception of how science operates? That entire fields are led by radical ideologues, and that despite glaring methodological flaws obvious even to laymen no dissenting views are accepted by journals because they fail to conform? In the social sciences this doesn't sound implausible at all. Remember this paper?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Montasque posted:Also there's a rumour that she's joining Milo's new "NotBreitbart" news. My guess is Gavin also leaves Rebel sooner rather than later, possibly to link up with Milo as well. Eagerly awaiting the This Aint Breitbart: A XXX Parody
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:46 |
|
|
Throwdini posted:If somebody could make an IQ test where African-Americans scored as high as Whites, the "IQ doesn't exist" crowd wouldn't be around. people know i was shitposting when i made that previous post right?  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2017 02:11
|
|